You might have noticed that TER has added a new private board for those members who have 10 or more reviews.  In keeping with that, Sly and I will unmoderate any member here who also has 10 or more reviews and has a record of useful posts on the pornstar board.  So if you qualify, PM Sly or myself and we'll be happy to set your status to un-moderated.

Maybe thats what this board needs to turn its self around, more exclusivity, I've heard that the provider board is unmoderated and has become a wealth of information for the ladies, I've also heard that many of the ladies on the provider board use alias's to hide their identity , its ok to voice your opinion, but don't let anyone know who you are, you never know who is listening.

as always

Happy Hunting

Just A Thought

as always

Happy Hunting

OK, I have NO idea what that post is all about.  Exactly what point were you trying to make?

Let's see... LESS people being moderated = MORE exclusivity?  How does that work?

You break the board up into exclusive little groups where they can gossip among themselves and feel special, how does that make the board a better place?.

as always

Happy Hunting

Just a quick poll from the participants here:

How about if someone has no reviews, has a lot to contribute (but usually doesn't), is currently unmoderated, and continually is a negative influence on this board? Should the moderators make sure that that person goes back to being moderated?

Sly

If you have no reviews, then you arent special and you can't ride the little bus.

as always

Happy Hunting

What the fuck are you talking about?  We're trying to make the pornstar board LESS exclusive by unmoderating more people.  I didn't say that you HAD to have 10 or more reviews to be unmoderated; only that if you did you may ask to become so.  What are you worried about... that if more people were unmoderated your status as such wouldn't be as big a deal? It seems to me that you want more exclusivity, not less.

Now if you rant is referring to the Reviewers Only board, neither Sly or myself had anything to do with that, although personally I have no problem with it... you see it as making TER more exclusive, I see it as rewarding people who make positive contributions.  Not to bruise your ego, but only 2% of the people who visit TER use the boards; the rest come for the review database - so why shouldn't those who do the most to make TER successfull be granted a few perks?

If you're jealous that the Reviewers Only board is unavailable to you, just post ten reviews and you can be part of the inner circle.

Geez Jim, you're such a whiner!  

-- Modified on 6/6/2006 12:22:43 PM

My bet is that as long as Ed or I post a reply to one of your messages, that you will continue to post to get the last word in.

Sly

Well, that's a good way to avoid answering the questions; but you've always been good at that.

I truly appreciate your feedback. You certainly do fit the description that I laid out so perfectly:

1. No reviews
2. Have a lot to contribute (but usually don't)
3. Currently unmoderated
4. Continually a negative influence on this board

Based upon your feedback and for the good of this board, you are now back on moderation. I would have to guess that this is probably the longest stretch of time that you have ever been unmoderated, but it's obvious that you don't like the current direction of this board, so perhaps you'll like it better the way it used to be when you were moderated?

Unfortunately, you don't get to ride this bus with impunity any more!

Sly

As someone who has been on these boards since its inception, and now wearing proudly the mark of 'moderation' (since a few months ago, for what I wouldn't know), I took a brief tour of the discussion boards 4-5 years ago. One would be surprised to see how many "reads" there were in General Discussion, and how few there are now.

Why this would be true, I'm not sure. Possibly it has to do with the dot-com explosion, or possibly changes in the board itself. However, it's never good to lose so much 'foot-traffic' with a commercial site.

Thank you Sly.

So does this mean that people like me, who don't fit the 10 review criteria but have been good and respectful posters over the past 5 years automatically go to "moderated" status until we provide more reviews?  I recall Staff once stating that if a person goes on "moderated" status for one forum, they are automatically moderated on ALL forums of this website.  Its not really fair to put someone on "Moderated" status because they don't have a certain number of reviews.  I thought that's why there was a payment option. Moderating me on this board (only because I don't have 10 reviews) doesn't mean I should have to be monitored on all the others that don't have that same rule.

If TER has added an additional "Private" forum with such criteria... why do we need that here??  I think it's a call for Staff to make, not members who are volunteer moderators.  Having these rules only serve to place a level of heirarchy where certain members are considered "more important", "more valuable" or "better". If that's truly the direction TER wants to go then fine... but then refund my membership fees.

Of course, that raises a very important point. Bandwidth and hosting costs money, and a "reviewers only" site cannot sustain itself economically without paying members. To say that one is more important than the other is like saying that the egg is more important than the chicken, or vice versa.

And to the extent that this site is 'balkanized' into sub-boards (i.e., providers only, reviewers only etc.), then I would agree with ThomasJenkins that it becomes less interesting/useful to the vox populi.

TER does it again. I don't post reviews, my choice. I do maintain a membership though. TER creates a private board, now I have a "semi-membership". I guess I'm out of here again after my membership runs out. Thanks again TER.

I think my posts are currently unmoderated, but I do not post reviews and will obviously not be part of the "reviewers only" board. I'll say this to the members who may feel slighted at not being in the private board: The true players in the game, with the exception of a very small handful, do not post reviews......so you will not really be missing much if you are not in that board!

Thomas, you misread the post.  Those who are currently unmoderated, regardless of their number of reviews, will stay unmoderated as long as they continue to follow the guidelines of the boards.  Those who are currently moderated and have 10 or more reviews and have shown to follow said guidelines will be unmoderated.  Also, if you do NOT have 10 reviews but have been a long time member of the board and have contributed may also be unmoderated as well.  The 10 review number just makes it more automatic, that's all.

For the longest time, I never did reviews, I would only post brief over-views on porn star or Los Angeles board of the providers I saw & paid for the membership fee..

But one benefit of doing reviews is the info. you exchange in PM's w/other posters...I mean, if you ask another poster(s) questions & you can offer some info. in return, then you both benefit...Some posters may only answer PM's if you have some reviews....The info. I received from a couple posters in PM's was a GREAT help before I went to London last year....

-- Modified on 6/7/2006 7:39:09 AM

You make a good point, but you failed to add that the true players in the game not only do not post reviews, they don't post messages on these boards.

I would hate to feel left out.  What do us guys who contribute when we can, and only posted few reviews, do?  I've been paying for a VIP membership for four years, and I don't think it should be split up, though honestly, I don't think I have the full understanding of it all.  Please explain every little detail.

Well, you no longer can wear that mark of moderation with pride.  I just unmoderated you.  Sorry!